Navigation

The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us.

Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help end theism, dogma, violence, hatred, and other irrationality. Buy an Xbox 360 -- PS3 -- Laptop -- Apple

Should they be allowed to continue this? Could the consequences be far worse than benefits?

What about overpopulaton? If people don't die of old age, wouldn't war, poverty, environmental damage, accidents and disease control the population? Turning the earth into a hell that may not be worth living in?

Should they be forced to share the technology with everyone on the planet or could they sell the FOY to the highest bidders? Does the government need to pay for this as it is healthcare?

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen

I'm not remotely convinced this could lead to eternal life (or even a really long one), wouldn't be the first case of such preposterous exaggeration in science journalism. I'll answer your questions assuming that it could though, just for the sake of argument.

EXC wrote:

Should they be allowed to continue this? Could the consequences be far worse than benefits?

Humans always find a way to use new technology in assholish ways. Modern medicine's ability to keep people alive for years on end when in the past their condition would have killed them in a tiny fraction of that time is a great example - there's nothing inherently evil about that technology, but since humans suck we use it to force suffering people to live against their will for ridicilous stretches of time. Do I want those same assholes to have the power to keep people alive even longer? Hell no. We could also of course be deliberate assholes and torture someone for thousands of years if we can just keep on repairing them, an even more disgusting possibility.

I'm obviously not gonna pretend this can't be used for productive purposes but I'm sure other people will be more than happy to cover that side, someone has to argue from the pessimistic POV.

Quote:

What about overpopulaton? If people don't die of old age, wouldn't war, poverty, environmental damage, accidents and disease control the population? Turning the earth into a hell that may not be worth living in?

If the assholes doing the overpopulating knew they were definitely gonna live to face the consequences then maybe they'd worry more about it and pop out less kids. It could also naturally curb reproduction as it would at least take away a few idiotic justifications for making babies, like "someone has to carry on the family name!" and other such nonsensical vicarious immortality crap.

I think it's also worth considering that we know societal change tends to be expedited by new generations taking over, so keeping the same assholes around forever could actually retard progress even though a longer life obviously allows one to become more educated and all that.

I'm not remotely convinced this could lead to eternal life (or even a really long one), wouldn't be the first case of such preposterous exaggeration in science journalism. I'll answer your questions assuming that it could though, just for the sake of argument.

What is different this time is that a lot of reputable institutions like Johns Hopkins are working on this. I think if society treated stem cell research like a kind of Manhattan project it could get done in a few decades. I believe that in 20 years stem cells and nanotechnology will revolutionize medicine and in 40 years it will be able to give us the fountain of youth.

Unfortunately it's not even discussed much. The change will happen before society and government is ready to deal with all the consequences. So it will probably lead to chaos initially.

Manageri wrote:

Humans always find a way to use new technology in assholish ways. Modern medicine's ability to keep people alive for years on end when in the past their condition would have killed them in a tiny fraction of that time is a great example - there's nothing inherently evil about that technology, but since humans suck we use it to force suffering people to live against their will for ridicilous stretches of time. Do I want those same assholes to have the power to keep people alive even longer? Hell no. We could also of course be deliberate assholes and torture someone for thousands of years if we can just keep on repairing them, an even more disgusting possibility.

I think the idea of regenerative medicine is to completely cure ailments, to return them to their youthful state. So it should lead to less suffering. The problems are going to come from the buying and selling. There will be scammers selling false cures, profiteers only selling cures to the highest bidders.

Manageri wrote:

If the assholes doing the overpopulating knew they were definitely gonna live to face the consequences then maybe they'd worry more about it and pop out less kids. It could also naturally curb reproduction as it would at least take away a few idiotic justifications for making babies, like "someone has to carry on the family name!" and other such nonsensical vicarious immortality crap.

Normally, a society would incarcerate "assholes" that are creating a lot of problems. Unfortunately, with this problem most people don't think about it or just want to let it go and create more problems.

Manageri wrote:

I think it's also worth considering that we know societal change tends to be expedited by new generations taking over, so keeping the same assholes around forever could actually retard progress even though a longer life obviously allows one to become more educated and all that.

In the future, I think evolution will switch from being solely reproduction/genetic driven to being computer/knowledge driven. It has already started with genetic engineering.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen

If the assholes doing the overpopulating knew they were definitely gonna live to face the consequences then maybe they'd worry more about it and pop out less kids. It could also naturally curb reproduction as it would at least take away a few idiotic justifications for making babies, like "someone has to carry on the family name!" and other such nonsensical vicarious immortality crap.

I think it's also worth considering that we know societal change tends to be expedited by new generations taking over, so keeping the same assholes around forever could actually retard progress even though a longer life obviously allows one to become more educated and all that.

Off topic here Manageri, but your mention of anti-natalism and some of your arguments got me to actually browsing the web for it.

Have you ever heard of a youtube guy named Gary InMendenham ? He has a website called Do Not God. com ?

The reason I ask is because your arguments are a whole lot like his. Your above responses sound almost identical to something he would say.

I don't agree with everything InMendenham states. But I do find it hilarious when he takes people's videos that are out to debunk his position and responds to them. He is good at tearing their arguments to pieces.

If you hadn't heard of him, I would reccomend checking him out.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno

I am really not sure why so many morons try to make anti-Gary videos on youtube.

Gary is just going to take their video and make them look like idiots.

Although, the more morons that do that, the more entertainment that I can get. I have watched maybe fifteen or sixteen of them.

Gotta admit, he has some good points and he also points out that he does not go to people's channels and fuck with them, they make videos in an attempt to fuck with HIM. So they have pretty much asked for it when it happens.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno